Skip to main content

About your Search

Search Results 0 to 5 of about 6 (some duplicates have been removed)
, but complimentary tools. >> if i could add some insight? >> my time is up, but go ahead, mr. joyce. they are just here to help. go ahead. >> i just want to add, as you mentioned before, you know, how many ducks do we need? we have to frame this by understanding who the adversary is and what they are trying to do. they are trying to harm americans. they are trying to strike america. what we need is all these tools, so you mentioned the value of 702 # versus the value of business records 215. they are different. i make the analogy like a baseball team. you have your most valuable player, but you have players who hit singles every day. >> mr. joyce -- >> i just want to relate to the homeland plots. in the plot to bomb the new york subway system, business record 215 played a role. it identifies specifically a number we did not previously know -- >> it was a critical role? >> what i'm saying is what it plays -- >> undercover work that took place in there? >> yes, there was some undercover work, but what i'm saying is that each tool plays a different role, mr. chairman. i'm not saying that it is the m
collectively that were tipped to the fbi in 2012. >> let me ask mr. joyce this question. how many probable cause warrants were issued by the fbi in 2012? >> i can get you those numbers following the hearing. >> i think we appreciate that. >> i would add you make a very good point. once that information is passed to us involving anyone in the united states, we must go to the foreign intelligence surveillance court and show probable cause warrant to provide content. >> the nsa has produced an declassified a chart. it has the 54 total event. it includes section 702 authority and section 215 authority. it shows the events disrupted a stunning combination of these two programs. 13 in the homeland. 25 in europe. five in africa, and 11 in asia. now, i \remember, i was on the intelligence committee before 9/11. and every member how little information -- i remove or how little information we had the criticism of the government because of these stovepipes, the inability to share intelligence, the inability to collect intelligence, we had no \program that could have caught two people in san diego bef
that was described on, i believe, 34 different occasions. the legal precedent is there. >> mr. joyce, one part of the two strike ise protecting privacy of americans. the other one, national security. boston bombing, we had prevented large-scale terrorist attacks on american soil. i have a few questions about how valuable the role of section 215 and 702 programs have played in predicting our national security . two questions, then i'll have to stop and go to our colleagues. can you describe any specific situation where section 215 and section 702 authorities helped disrupt a terrorist attack or identify individuals planning to times -- ifumber of you do not have authority to collect phone records and evolve the way they are now under section 215, how would you have effected those investigations? as affers question, as for specific example of when we utilized both of these programs. plots sinceected 9/11. whenptember of 2009, others conspired to plot to bomb the new york subway system. about himly found out through and nsa 702 coverage. he was talking to an al qaeda courier. his help tog for per
you very much, let ask this. >> thank you all very much. bestwith regard to mr. joyce's comments about dealing with the thing that you could interdict and stop. the collection of data under this program played a role in the culmination of that case. youamentally you are a -- are a deputy attorney general under janet reno for six years you are the member of criminal justice. used ids issues using that as -- you have studied this issue. has this violated because it using it anyway by defying u.s. >> and the constitution? >> thank you for the promotion, i never served as judy attorney general. attorney general. i had a couple positions. >> i have a hard time keeping all the deputy assistant straight. i just want to raise a certain point. >> we can all agree he is highly qualified. >>i think the answer is under the controlling case law that the collection of this kind of telephone metadata from the telephone companies is not violating anyone's constitutional rights. >> when as a federal was autor, -- when i federal prosecutor you are a federal posterior. ,this complex case resulted in a su
support really ran deep. host: firsthand account from joyce lander who was here in washington on the mall 50 years ago. back to your calls and comments. joe is joining us from oklahoma, city, good morning. caller: good morning. big fan of mr. dyson. i will say, i wasn't part of that speech until recently, i pulled it up and watched the whole thing. i kept thinking when he was talking about martin being like a jazz musician, i was thinking he was more like a marcellus or somebody. his words were beautiful and his message was great. i definitely think sometimes we look back in history and thinking about all of that as far as how it impacted people is fantastic. we can't lose sight of what he really wanted us to do which is to focus on making america for everybody. to that end we have a couple things. the fact that we have greed that keeps -- someone over here having a $10 million wedding and a family over here can't buy tooth paste. that's what's wrong with america. we need to think about the fairness doctrine. i hear nobody talking about it. it led a nationwide fox news tell half truths a
Search Results 0 to 5 of about 6 (some duplicates have been removed)